Anyone Agree with Tim Graham on This?

[spartacus]

I know there were no other substantial offers, because the Bills ended-up settling for the 28th overall pick. And the only other team interested was the Giants, and some unnamed 3rd team, again both of whom didn't offer more than the 28th overall pick.

 

As for the Eagles and challenging for the SB, they've been doing that without Peters. Not to mention the Steelers and Giants won SB's without "stud" and overpriced LT's.

so basically you don't know anything other than what you made up

 

there could have been 28 other teams offering packages of picks and players comparable to the Eagles offer that fit your criteria.

 

The Eagles actually offered their earlier pick (21st I believe) but the Bills wanted an additional low round pick in 2010 for some unknown reason.

[VOR]

so basically you don't know anything other than what you made up

 

there could have been 28 other teams offering packages of picks and players comparable to the Eagles offer that fit your criteria.

Sure and the Bills could have refused the 21st overall just so that they could get the 28th overall pick and a 6th rounder in 2010.

 

The Eagles actually offered their earlier pick (21st I believe) but the Bills wanted an additional low round pick in 2010 for some unknown reason.

[Peter]

I am too lazy right now to look it up, but if you have been reading this board you will know that someone else already did an analysis of this. The sacks charged against him last year were inflated. The Bills themselves (according to media reports) also concluded the same thing.

 

The easiest way to determine the worth of JP is compare what happened in the Giant game at the end of 2007 before and after he got hurt.

 

This what I was referring to:

 

Analysis of Jason Peters

[Kelly the Dog]

I still find it interesting that despite this, only the Eagles offered anything substantial for Peters. I mean, if you were the Rams, wouldn't you rather trade your 2nd overall pick to the Bills and get "the best LT in the NFL" for less money than the wholly unproven #2 overall pick will be getting? What about the Bengals at 6th overall, who will have to spend the same amount for Andre Smith, a guy with major question marks? Why didn't the Giants (the only other team mentioned by name who was interested in Peters) offer their 29th overall pick and their 3rd rounder? I'm betting it's because of the cons you listed.

The second overall pick last year signed for 48 mil for 5 years. The sixth pick, like your Bengals example, signed for 32 million over five. Huge difference in money as opposed to 6-60 that Peters got. The third pick, Matt Ryan signed for 6-66 but they way overpaid and it was because he was a QB.

[Thurman#1]

Sorry Bandit, but beg to differ - as does Ross Tucker...

 

"There is no way that I, as an offensive lineman, would know how well the corners or safeties around the league are truly playing. And do you honestly think the wide receivers really know what defensive tackle is doing the best job stopping the run? Please. All they know is what they hear on the scouting report, if they were even listening during that portion, or from the media hype machine that carries certain players to Hawaii every year."

 

link

 

Two major holes in your hypothesis -

 

1) Coaches and players do not 'study the entire league 5 times over, year-round' (you really don't believe they're that studious, do you?) - they study the teams they will face that season, and likely only the team they will face that week, and likely only the week before they face that particular team;

 

2) Coaches and players tend to study opposing positional players, rather than every single player in the league - i.e., an opposing WR, RB, QB, etc. is unlikely to spend any time at all studying film of Jason Peters or any other LT.

 

 

Yeah, and I'm sure that if I were a safety who had to vote for an all-pro candidate at LT, I'm sure I would vote based on hype alone. There's no possible way I would ever:

 

1) ask the DEs on my team who they didn't like to play, after all, this would require a walk of probably 30 or 40 feet in the locker room

 

or

 

2) just not vote for anyone at that position if I didn't feel I had a good idea of what was going on there

 

------

 

I'm definitely willing to concede that just because you're a pro doesn't mean that you automatically know the difference between a good season and a not so good one for each player in the league. But there are only about 1600 players in the league. You really don't think word doesn't get around about who is having a good season and who's not? Particularly with the huge amount of player movement, most guys in the league have friends on other clubs and are likely to talk football with their own teammates and friends on other teams. Yeah, you might not know much about a lot of the mediocre players, but you would have a pretty good idea about the best guys in the league. Not a perfect idea, I totally grant you, but a much better idea than the fans do.

[Thurman#1]

hey vj91 just so you know, Russ offered Jason Peters the Richest/largest contract in team history this past offseason before we traded him, check post #82 by Lori, better yet here it is.

 

"There's the rub. Remember what Brandon said:

"... we offered Jason an enormous contract – the largest contract in Bills history – and he had no interest in it. None."

 

"We felt very strongly that Jason was not going to come back to camp, was not going to participate, and we were going to be in the same situation (as last year)."

 

I think most of us agree that there was very little chance of a deal getting done".

 

 

just an FYI, we did try

 

 

 

Yeah, we did try, but the Eagles offered market value and the Bills didn't. Look around at league salaries and how many players are being paid more than the largest contract in Bills history (Lee Evans). Particularly as Russ didn't say whether he meant the largest per year or the largest total number.

 

I totally agree with vj91, yeah, we made an offer. But we should have offered market value. Peters signed for just about the median between the Bills original offer and Peters's first demand. Just about what most people figured he would get.

 

Well, as vj said, we will see what happens. And yeah, I do like Wood's potential. But we should have offered market value.

[Kelly the Dog]

Yeah, and I'm sure that if I were a safety who had to vote for an all-pro candidate at LT, I'm sure I would vote based on hype alone. There's no possible way I would ever:

 

1) ask the DEs on my team who they didn't like to play, after all, this would require a walk of probably 30 or 40 feet in the locker room

 

or

 

2) just not vote for anyone at that position if I didn't feel I had a good idea of what was going on there

 

------

 

I'm definitely willing to concede that just because you're a pro doesn't mean that you automatically know the difference between a good season and a not so good one for each player in the league. But there are only about 1600 players in the league. You really don't think word doesn't get around about who is having a good season and who's not? Particularly with the huge amount of player movement, most guys in the league have friends on other clubs and are likely to talk football with their own teammates and friends on other teams. Yeah, you might not know much about a lot of the mediocre players, but you would have a pretty good idea about the best guys in the league. Not a perfect idea, I totally grant you, but a much better idea than the fans do.

I get a kick out of the argument that being selected to the pro bowl is all a popularity contest or little measure of how good you are or how well you played. Here is the 2009 Pro Bowl roster. Sure, you could argue player A or B didnt deserve it or Player C or D did, but it's a pretty accurate assessment of last year's stars. There are young and old, first timers and second and third timers. Guys out of nowhere and perrenial solid players.

http://www.nfl.com/probowl/story?id=09000d...mp;confirm=true

[DazedandConfused]

Actually, I think it's because the rest of the NFL coaches, GMs, and scouts are not privy to the knowledge that FatStupidLazyLardAss is the bestest, greatest LT alive - that fact is only known by a select few posters here on TSW who, quite selfishly, have chosen not to share it with every other front office in the league.

It probably is wishful thinking by Jason Peters Mom and a few others that he is clearly the best LT in football. However, this flight of fancy seems to be easily exceeded by those who simply classify Peters as a FatStupidblahblahblah.

 

The fact of the matter is that the Bills did a tremendous job convincing this UDFA to come to lil ol Buffalo when he had offers from several other teams. They deserve credit for being led by the Mouse to recognize that this player firmly committed to being a TE actually had the right stuff to play tackle.

 

On top of this great recognition, an excellent job of coaching and some incredibly successful (and likely hard) work by Peters not only proved him worthy of an RT starting slot (already an amazing achievement in the just started career of a youngster) but he in fact proved talented and productive enough to take the LT starting slot.

 

The fact he made the Pro Bowl as a starter so quickly and by a pretty broad consensus deserved the nod the first time her got it was simply a virtually unbelievable achievement.

 

Did he deserve his second Pro Bowl nod? Almost certainly not from those who watched him play.

 

However, this opinion which I accept as fact in no way simply nullify the FACTs laid out describing his early achievements.

 

The sad fact IMHO is that the FO blew it big time by not locking up Peters for even longer after his first Pro Bowl nod. The price of another contract would have been small compared to what the market in fact delivered to him when he jumped ship on the BIlls (again say what you want about Philly's judgment but the market is the market and the simple fact is that the market gave Peters the 6/60 deal he signed. Other theoriwa about other team's lack of interest may be true but simply do not compare at all to the fact the market did determine Peters' value at 6/60 and the Bills could almost certainly have gotten him for much less than that last year.

 

The FO simply flat out mishandled the OL situation as they delivered a truckload of cash to Dockery which was simply a failed decision. Add to that the actual fact that they lost their 2x Pro Bowl LT for a small compensation in most folks view and now our team is simply rebuilding the OL with a bunch of youngsters led by overpaid or highly paid journeymen like Walker and Hamgartner.

 

Assessments of the OL situation which simply ignore the actual facts and seem to let the Bills FO management off the hook for this debacle simply come across as hollow sour grapes. Peters is not the greatest LT ever in my book, but as misguided as these assessments are they look like a great thing compared to the selective ignorance shown by many of the Peters trashers,

[Thurman#1]

 

and you know that there were not other offers - ---how???

 

The Bills don't even release contract info on their own players -

 

why would you think they released info on potential trade offers?

 

but just keep making up stuff and watch the Eagles challenge for a Super Bowl with a stud LT

 

 

 

Yeah, they don't release info on even unaccepted offers that they make, according to their policy. Although they ignore that policy from time to time when it's in their own interest. Russ commented that they had made an offer to Peters that was the largest in team history. What is that if not info on a contract offer?

 

And yeah, there may have been some under-the-table offers, other than the Giants and Eagles. But what the haters ignore is that there were surely lots of teams looking at the situation and saying, "Jeez, I sure would love to have Peters on the team, but not with the salary cap situation what it is in now heading into the season with Peters expecting a huge contract." People are willing to ignore the obvious in pursuit of furthering their agenda. Teams around the league knew that Peters would get a huge offer and that he wasn't likely to play for what he was getting, at least till the start of the season.

 

Around the league, when a guy signs a contract, it is usually with one or two or maybe three teams showing interest as the rest are happy with their situation at that position, don't have the money or don't want to spend it (that would be us, usually) and let's face it when a guy gets a market value contract, that means there are 31 teams out there who wouldn't pay that much in that situation and most of them simply know that they are not in the right situation to acquire that player. And that's not to even mention the teams that might think "Gee, the guy is terrific, but might not fit our scheme/chemistry/player profile ..."

 

That's what happened with Peters.

[Mickey]

It probably is wishful thinking by Jason Peters Mom and a few others that he is clearly the best LT in football. However, this flight of fancy seems to be easily exceeded by those who simply classify Peters as a FatStupidblahblahblah.

 

The fact of the matter is that the Bills did a tremendous job convincing this UDFA to come to lil ol Buffalo when he had offers from several other teams. They deserve credit for being led by the Mouse to recognize that this player firmly committed to being a TE actually had the right stuff to play tackle.

 

On top of this great recognition, an excellent job of coaching and some incredibly successful (and likely hard) work by Peters not only proved him worthy of an RT starting slot (already an amazing achievement in the just started career of a youngster) but he in fact proved talented and productive enough to take the LT starting slot.

 

The fact he made the Pro Bowl as a starter so quickly and by a pretty broad consensus deserved the nod the first time her got it was simply a virtually unbelievable achievement.

 

Did he deserve his second Pro Bowl nod? Almost certainly not from those who watched him play.

 

However, this opinion which I accept as fact in no way simply nullify the FACTs laid out describing his early achievements.

 

The sad fact IMHO is that the FO blew it big time by not locking up Peters for even longer after his first Pro Bowl nod. The price of another contract would have been small compared to what the market in fact delivered to him when he jumped ship on the BIlls (again say what you want about Philly's judgment but the market is the market and the simple fact is that the market gave Peters the 6/60 deal he signed. Other theoriwa about other team's lack of interest may be true but simply do not compare at all to the fact the market did determine Peters' value at 6/60 and the Bills could almost certainly have gotten him for much less than that last year.

 

The FO simply flat out mishandled the OL situation as they delivered a truckload of cash to Dockery which was simply a failed decision. Add to that the actual fact that they lost their 2x Pro Bowl LT for a small compensation in most folks view and now our team is simply rebuilding the OL with a bunch of youngsters led by overpaid or highly paid journeymen like Walker and Hamgartner.

 

Assessments of the OL situation which simply ignore the actual facts and seem to let the Bills FO management off the hook for this debacle simply come across as hollow sour grapes. Peters is not the greatest LT ever in my book, but as misguided as these assessments are they look like a great thing compared to the selective ignorance shown by many of the Peters trashers,

Well done. I would only add that calling Peters out in public when camp opened last year was inexplicably stupid. The only people who mattered in the negotiations were Peters, his agent and the front office. So why do something to alienate the player? It got the fans all riled up but they don't have a seat at the table so why tick off someone who does?

[VOR]

The second overall pick last year signed for 48 mil for 5 years. The sixth pick, like your Bengals example, signed for 32 million over five. Huge difference in money as opposed to 6-60 that Peters got. The third pick, Matt Ryan signed for 6-66 but they way overpaid and it was because he was a QB.

Peters will get $24M in guaranteed money, which is the most important part, since contracts rarely last the entire length. Chris Long got a 6-year $56.6M contract with $29M in guaranteed money. Adjusting for inflation, the 2nd overall pick will probably get around a 6-year $60M with $30M guaranteed. Vernon Gholston got a 5-year $50M with $21M guaranteed, and the 6th overall pick will make more this year.

[Kelly the Dog]

Peters will get $24M in guaranteed money, which is the most important part, since contracts rarely last the entire length. Chris Long got a 6-year $56.6M contract with $29M in guaranteed money. Adjusting for inflation, the 2nd overall pick will probably get around a 6-year $60M with $30M guaranteed. Vernon Gholston got a 5-year $50M with $21M guaranteed, and the 6th overall pick will make more this year.

 

I have yet to see these guys wrong on contracts, although it probably has happened. Gholston got 32 mil. The incentives in these deals are all over the place and they are usually not the likely to be earned kind like making the pro bowl and winning the super bowl. Especially with the start he got.

7/24/2008: Signed a five-year, $32.5 million contract. The deal includes $21 million guaranteed. Another $17.5 million is available through incentives. 2009: $2.9 million, 2010: $3.48 million, 2011: $4.06 million, 2012: $4.64 million, 2013: Free Agent

 

Longs was 48 mil, with incentives.

 

Also, IMO it's just plain dumb for anyone to say the "guaranteed money" is the important part. It's a LOT more accurate and highly likely that "the guaranteed money plus the first three years of salary is the important part" because virtually everyone of these guys plays 2-3-4 years of those deals with that team before they are cut if they don't live up to the contract.

[DazedandConfused]

I have yet to see these guys wrong on contracts, although it probably has happened. Gholston got 32 mil. The incentives in these deals are all over the place and they are usually not the likely to be earned kind like making the pro bowl and winning the super bowl. Especially with the start he got.

 

Longs was 48 mil, with incentives.

 

Also, IMO it's just plain dumb for anyone to say the "guaranteed money" is the important part. It's a LOT more accurate and highly likely that "the guaranteed money plus the first three years of salary is the important part" because virtually everyone of these guys plays 2-3-4 years of those deals with that team before they are cut if they don't live up to the contract.

The irony in all this arguing over the Peters contract amount is that either way it goes it cuts against how the Bills FO handled this. Either folks believe Peters contract is in fact at the $60 million dollar level in which case if the FO had extended and raised his salary when he jumped from RT to LT and made the Pro Bowl they still could have gotten an even happier Pro Bowl worthy LT for a song compared to what he got from the market.

 

Alternately folks could argue that the $60 million is not real, but inherent in this argument is that the Bills still could have gotten a Pro Bowl worthy LT for even less than the huge contract reported if they had simply given him an extension and raise when he made the jump for RT to LT and made the Pro Bowl.

 

Folks seem to try to avoid the fact that either way you argue interpreting the contract the Bills could have gotten him for less or much less if they had built and maintained their OL more intelligently by simply ignoring the hard work an achievement by Peters in moving from being a UDFA at TE to earning a roster spot to earning an RT slot to earning an LT spot to earning a Pro Bowl nod the first time he got it.

 

Instead some folks seem to want to conclude that you can achieve these things by being a stupidlardass.

 

It is certainly the case for almost any objective observer that there is no way Peters played at a Pro Bowl worthy level last year. However, to acknowledge this fact (IMHO) but somehow to totally discount the other part of reality when the Bills were overpaying Dockery a huge amount and likely overpaying Walker a huge amount just comes off as silly.

[The Senator]

The irony in all this arguing over the Peters contract amount is that either way it goes it cuts against how the Bills FO handled this. Either folks believe Peters contract is in fact at the $60 million dollar level in which case if the FO had extended and raised his salary when he jumped from RT to LT and made the Pro Bowl they still could have gotten an even happier Pro Bowl worthy LT for a song compared to what he got from the market.

 

Alternately folks could argue that the $60 million is not real, but inherent in this argument is that the Bills still could have gotten a Pro Bowl worthy LT for even less than the huge contract reported if they had simply given him an extension and raise when he made the jump for RT to LT and made the Pro Bowl.

 

Folks seem to try to avoid the fact that either way you argue interpreting the contract the Bills could have gotten him for less or much less if they had built and maintained their OL more intelligently by simply ignoring the hard work an achievement by Peters in moving from being a UDFA at TE to earning a roster spot to earning an RT slot to earning an LT spot to earning a Pro Bowl nod the first time he got it.

 

Instead some folks seem to want to conclude that you can achieve these things by being a stupidlardass.

 

It is certainly the case for almost any objective observer that there is no way Peters played at a Pro Bowl worthy level last year. However, to acknowledge this fact (IMHO) but somehow to totally discount the other part of reality when the Bills were overpaying Dockery a huge amount and likely overpaying Walker a huge amount just comes off as silly.

Excuse me...

 

That's FatLazyStupidLardAss

[VOR]

I have yet to see these guys wrong on contracts, although it probably has happened. Gholston got 32 mil. The incentives in these deals are all over the place and they are usually not the likely to be earned kind like making the pro bowl and winning the super bowl. Especially with the start he got.

7/24/2008: Signed a five-year, $32.5 million contract. The deal includes $21 million guaranteed. Another $17.5 million is available through incentives. 2009: $2.9 million, 2010: $3.48 million, 2011: $4.06 million, 2012: $4.64 million, 2013: Free Agent

 

Longs was 48 mil, with incentives.

 

Also, IMO it's just plain dumb for anyone to say the "guaranteed money" is the important part. It's a LOT more accurate and highly likely that "the guaranteed money plus the first three years of salary is the important part" because virtually everyone of these guys plays 2-3-4 years of those deals with that team before they are cut if they don't live up to the contract.

LOL! The guaranteed money is far from "dumb." That's what a player can at least expect from his contract. The total value of the contract is always overstated, because it includes incentives as you mentioned and backloaded salaries that are never seen since the contract gets redone or the player gets cut. And no one knows if the player will reach the incentives or see a new deal, but guaranteed money is guaranteed money. And again, these rookies are wholly unproven and not a "stud" LT like Peters supposedly is, so he's worth the additional money, if there is any.

[Mickey]

I'm pretty sure toddgurley was referring to the Peters of 2008...the one who left at the end of the 2007 season and didn't show up until the eve of the 2008 opener and proceeded to sleep walk through most of the season

ummm....they are the same guy, and I think you meant "sleep walk" into the pro bowl.

 

What do you think is the more rational conclusion, that a guy who worked as hard and as long as Peters did to get as good as he was in 2007 was really just lazy and stupid, a fact finally revealed in 2008 or that Peters held out as a business move (eventually resulting in a new, huge, contract years before his old deal was to expire) which cost him nothing but did effect his ability for one, repeat, one, year? Do you really think he held out because he is lazy and stupid or do you think maybe lazy had nothing do with what was strictly a business move? A very succesfull one as it turned out, for Peters anyway.

[offde-fence]

I think you've got to look at it this way: the Bills had to get rid of him, and to get something in return for him, as opposed to just releasing him, was good for us. Whether the line is better or worse without him is not the point. The point is that to have caved in to his contract demands, especially considering how he handled himself, would have sent a devastating message to present and future Bills players, and would have went further in ruining the nature of the game we love so much. Sure these guys deserve money; but, they sign contracts worth a great deal of money - these players make so much compared to most people (I know they're elite) - but, they have an agreement, and need to be held to their end. How else are teams supposed to build? If every guy that turns out to be a surprise demands mucho money, or else he won't play, then teams would be punished for drafting good, because they'd lose the men they put time into training. The salary cap and the structure of the league only work if both sides stick to their agreements. So, the Bills couldn't fold on this one, because a bunch of other guys would, deservedly or not, follow suit and say and do the same kinds of things. At least we got something for him.

[spartacus]

I think you've got to look at it this way: the Bills had to get rid of him, and to get something in return for him, as opposed to just releasing him, was good for us. Whether the line is better or worse without him is not the point. The point is that to have caved in to his contract demands, especially considering how he handled himself, would have sent a devastating message to present and future Bills players, and would have went further in ruining the nature of the game we love so much. Sure these guys deserve money; but, they sign contracts worth a great deal of money - these players make so much compared to most people (I know they're elite) - but, they have an agreement, and need to be held to their end. How else are teams supposed to build? If every guy that turns out to be a surprise demands mucho money, or else he won't play, then teams would be punished for drafting good, because they'd lose the men they put time into training. The salary cap and the structure of the league only work if both sides stick to their agreements. So, the Bills couldn't fold on this one, because a bunch of other guys would, deservedly or not, follow suit and say and do the same kinds of things. At least we got something for him.

 

Hi Russ

 

nice to see you trying to influence the masses on a message board

 

I see you still don't understand that winning teams accumulate elite talent - which requires fair market compensation- instead of running them out of town.

 

When a team lucks out and picks up a player without spending a high pick who turns into a superstar- the team should be more than willing to reward him with a fair market contract and pat themselves on the back for great talent evaluation.

 

Playing hardball with your best player "because you can" is the wrong message you are sending to your own team and future free agents.

 

Your comment about setting bad precedent is just stupid. If all of the multiple pro bowlers playing LT on the team lined up to get new contracts, it would be an awful short line. Reward superior play with fair contracts and there is no problem.

[BillsVet]

Well done. I would only add that calling Peters out in public when camp opened last year was inexplicably stupid. The only people who mattered in the negotiations were Peters, his agent and the front office. So why do something to alienate the player? It got the fans all riled up but they don't have a seat at the table so why tick off someone who does?

 

Let's all remember that Brandon was thrown into the fire after Levy retired. He had absolutely in evaluating talent, beside what people tell him. He had never scouted, negotiated with an agent, nothing.

 

It's my belief that Brandon is the public face for Wilson and Littman. He speaks well, is much younger, and has succeeded in marketing a team which really has a track record of failure going back nearly an entire decade. Unfortunately, he had no experience working with players. And it showed when he arrogantly said (based on a directive most likely from Littman and Wilson) that they would not renegotiate the Peters deal from 06.

 

They, like the Sabres, stuck to principle of not renegotiating and adhering to out-dated principles. I'm not one for renegotiating deals, but in this situation they took the nuclear option and it blew up in their face.

 

Losing Peters means moving the starting RT to LT (a position he's never played long term) and the RG to RT. It's more than just losing Peters, it's a whole lot more.

[VOR]

Hi Russ

 

nice to see you trying to influence the masses on a message board

 

I see you still don't understand that winning teams accumulate elite talent - which requires fair market compensation- instead of running them out of town.

 

When a team lucks out and picks up a player without spending a high pick who turns into a superstar- the team should be more than willing to reward him with a fair market contract and pat themselves on the back for great talent evaluation.

 

Playing hardball with your best player "because you can" is the wrong message you are sending to your own team and future free agents.

 

Your comment about setting bad precedent is just stupid. If all of the multiple pro bowlers playing LT on the team lined up to get new contracts, it would be an awful short line. Reward superior play with fair contracts and there is no problem.

When a player sits-out the entire off- and pre-season, decides to come back the day before the season starts, plays like crap and doesn't give a sh-- that he does, he doesn't deserve a huge new contract. Other guys actually showed-up to off-season activities, and then got paid. Good riddance.